TLS 1.1 uses version encoded in two bytes that should mean "SSL 3.2", TLS 1.2 uses bytes that should mean "SSL 3.3". TLS 1.3 pretends to be TLS 1.2 to pass through proxies but internally uses two bytes that should mean SSL 3.4 to indicate its version.
_TECHNICALLY_ the only thing that exists is TLS. The implementation history is SSL 3.0 < TLS 1.0 ... 1.3
However, SSL is still used colloquially in conversation, e.g. "SSL certificate" and in many legacy config flags, such as Firefox's `about:config`.
For best clarity, check the details of all those settings, even the SSL ones. But TLS is the term for the modern standards.
Colloquially we still say "SSL" a lot when referring to TLS.
I know it really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, but man does it make my eye twitch lol.
I've tried using TLS instead of SSL but due to the friction of general acceptance of SSL I don't see much point in trying to fight.
I wish that TLS 1.4 will be called Transport Security System Layer (TSSL) or something which can be referred to as SSL and we can all go back to normal again. ;)
No, it is a good example by now. A modern M.2 SSD looks much more like a stick of RAM than any kind of spinning disk.
Sure, spinning hard disks are still around, and might stick around for quite a while (data centers, archival...), but when someone at their desk says "save on disk" nowadays, it increasingly will be on such an entirely non-disk-looking disk.
They even have aluminium sliding parts and what looks like some sort of disk inside...
/s
But they don't actually mean SSL vs TLS. They mean a TLS connection (like HTTPS uses) vs StartTLS (where you start out SMTP plaintext then negotiate TLS as an extension.